The "flying family car"

Jeff Oslick said:
Ok, you tell me what's wrong with this article.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/01/family.plane.ap/index.html

Jeff
Click to expand...


Oh my god, this line made me gag. She is going to kill someone.

"You can literally read a book up there," said Neibauer, who sold Huntsman her first four-seater plane for $326,000 three years ago.

And read is exactly what she does. "Last year, we got through Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn," Huntsman said.
 
Reminds me of a recent AOPA convention "Pinch-Hitter" course my wife was in - one participant said her husband would read the newspaper while flying on autopilot! :besick:

I really wish the Darwin Award contestants would stay out of the sky.

Jeff
 
What is the Lancair guy thinking, giving quotes like those? Just what we need the sort of people who watch CNN thinking, "those yahoos are up there reading books when they should be paying attention". I understand the need to sell planes, but we can't cut our own throats to do it.

Jim G
 
Judging by the way many fly without reading books,
it could actually be an improvement in safety. What's an autopilot for anyway ?

But, I would still make the ungrateful little Brats learn about navigation, aerodynamics & radios at least since they're flying in the family plane.
 
So the answer to "what's wrong with this article?" isn't so much the article but in the way the pilot uses her a/c as a people mover, she's merely along for the ride, instead of taking an active part in the flight?


Perhaps it is the article after all. The article conveys a careless attitude on the part of the pilot wherein that may not be the case at all. In any case, I have to agree with Dave that given the way some fly reading while on AP may be an improvement.
 
corjulo said:
Oh my god, this line made me gag. She is going to kill someone.

"You can literally read a book up there," said Neibauer, who sold Huntsman her first four-seater plane for $326,000 three years ago.

And read is exactly what she does. "Last year, we got through Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn," Huntsman said.
Click to expand...

Well..... I've been guilty of that. Read a paragraph, scan the sky and the panel, read another scan....When I've got a ten hour flight over open water it actually helps me stay awake, otherwise the monotony and the drone of the engine can put me to sleep, and that's worse.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Ok, you tell me what's wrong with this article.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/05/01/family.plane.ap/index.html

Jeff
Click to expand...

Aside from the pilot confusing her cockpit with the library, the other thing I found wrong with the article is the repeated references to how expensive everything is. Most folks just don't have a half million bucks to drop on a plane. If someone with an interest picked up the paper to read how affordable general aviation is, they probably lost interest when they kept reading how expensive it is. That article struck me as portraying GA as very much a rich person's domain, a perspective that must be defeated if we are to survive.
 
Joe Williams said:
Aside from the pilot confusing her cockpit with the library, the other thing I found wrong with the article is the repeated references to how expensive everything is. Most folks just don't have a half million bucks to drop on a plane. If someone with an interest picked up the paper to read how affordable general aviation is, they probably lost interest when they kept reading how expensive it is. That article struck me as portraying GA as very much a rich person's domain, a perspective that must be defeated if we are to survive.
Click to expand...

You may want to rethink that one taking a politicians perspective. Rich people =Campaign$$$ ergo, politicians dislike annoying rich people (and let me tell you, rich people are nickle and dime chislers) sum, when rich people are perceived to be involved in something, politicians don't mess with it too negatively.
 
Henning said:
You may want to rethink that one taking a politicians perspective. Rich people =Campaign$$$ ergo, politicians dislike annoying rich people (and let me tell you, rich people are nickle and dime chislers) sum, when rich people are perceived to be involved in something, politicians don't mess with it too negatively.
Click to expand...

Henning, how can you say such a thing in light of all that has been happening all the while the perception is and always has been that it is a rich man's sport. Put another way, history has and continues to prove your statement to be patently false.
 
Richard said:
Henning, how can you say such a thing in light of all that has been happening all the while the perception is and always has been that it is a rich man's sport. Put another way, history has and continues to prove your statement to be patently false.
Click to expand...

:confused: :confused: :confused: First off, history can't prove my statement false by your own precept, because there was never a time anywhere in the world when aviation was considered a "common mans' sport" to draw a comparison. You could just as easily be dead wron yourself, if General Aviation had ever been seen as a common thing, it may already be stricktly in the hands of governments and commercial carriers due to all the deaths that would be involved. Look at the highways, can you imagine what it would be like if all those people were in the air? We'll never know.

BTW, What all has happened? Not much really, not if you compare it to Europe, Canada, Australia.... I can't see how things would be better if it was a "common mans" activity. Face it, for GA, the USA has it better than most everywhere in the world, and it has been, and always will be considered by the masses, a rich mans game, especially ownership. In reality, unless you build your own aircraft, it is now cost pointed to be exclusionary. Cost of renting even simple aircraft is high. The "common man" works at least 10 hrs (median income $11.60 hr pre tax) to fly one hr in a basic single engine plane, that's over a day's pay, and owning them is even higher. Face it, even for an older PA 28 series plane or 172, you need to have an extra 15+k a year hanging around, and that doesn't include purchase price. Most people don't have that to spend on aviation, and many that do are sacraficing other things, like savings and investments, to have it. Don't get me wrong, that's not meant as a criticism, just an observation. Now if we want to talk a performance twin, better be able to sustain a $100,000 budget. Don't believe me? Ask Robert Gerace. The certified end of GA at least is a rich mans game, the homebuilt end runs the entire spectrum. The only end of GA that's price pointed for the "common man" is ultra-light, and you still need 7-10k to get a decent one of those.
 
Henning, a lot of politicians have done a lot of things which are not favorable to GA. Everything from enacting discriminatory curfews to exhorbiant landing fees to closing rwys to even tearing them out under cover of darkness. Politicians Vs the rich guy. And which pol was it that stood firm against the TFR madness?

Geez, the list grows long about how the pols don't seem to desire to curry favor with the rich guy.
 
Henning said:
...Now if we want to talk a performance twin, better be able to sustain a $100,000 budget. Don't believe me? Ask Robert Gerace.
Click to expand...

That actually *is* the budget to fly a 310R 300 hours per year. I think people thought I was kidding in Ben's "Lucky you" thread...sigh...

But, I am an example of how you don't have to be rich to do it. I'm just an ordinary guy with no 401k or retirement fund...like many people now trying to 'get rich' in real estate.

I also run a company that had almost that much of a budget for me traveling anyway...and I did a 3 year sales job on the board and actually got them to sign off on it. Like most things, it's not always what you know or have...but who you talk into stuff on your behalf.

Now, if I ever *do* get rich, there is a VLJ in my future! :dance:
 
RobertGerace said:
That actually *is* the budget to fly a 310R 300 hours per year. I think people thought I was kidding in Ben's "Lucky you" thread...sigh......
Click to expand...

Yeah, lot of bucks, that's more than "common people" earn in a year with a median income of $28,xxx.

RobertGerace said:
But, I am an example of how you don't have to be rich to do it. I'm just an ordinary guy with no 401k or retirement fund...like many people now trying to 'get rich' in real estate.

I also run a company that had almost that much of a budget for me traveling anyway...
Click to expand...

So we aren't really talking recreational aviation here either, this is also Business aviation, and business aviation at its best. BTW, That last statement put you out of the "Common Man" sector. You may not consider yourself rich. but I bet a lot of people do. I'd say to the majority of people an income >$125k per annum is in the "rich" sector of the funwheel, and I'd be willing to wager you're around that if not better. It's all a matter of perspective.


RobertGerace said:
and I did a 3 year sales job on the board and actually got them to sign off on it. Like most things, it's not always what you know or have...but who you talk into stuff on your behalf.
Click to expand...

So this is subsidized by the business. That's perfectly fine with me. Heck, I make my living playing with other peoples toys. I talk people into doing stuff I want all the time. The one good thing I found out about rich people, you can talk em into nearly anything if they can gain enough from the venture, and the gain doesn't have to be monetary, I sell people on $350,000 weeklong vacations.
 
Richard said:
Henning, a lot of politicians have done a lot of things which are not favorable to GA. Everything from enacting discriminatory curfews to exhorbiant landing fees to closing rwys to even tearing them out under cover of darkness. Politicians Vs the rich guy. And which pol was it that stood firm against the TFR madness?

Geez, the list grows long about how the pols don't seem to desire to curry favor with the rich guy.
Click to expand...

Please give me a list of the airports with these landing fees, There's only a couple of places I ever pay a fee and they are private. Class Bs I've gone into charge a fee, and that is mostly to discourage slow planes from screwing up traffic. I've flown all over this country with no landing fees. Europe OTOH always fees.

As to airports closing and runways being torn up, the ones I know of are now condo and subdivision developements. Those are real estate developers getting that done,They're THE RICH . Those are the very wealthy. Those are the people I know who have $30,000,0000 boats and get to them via their G-IV.
 
Henning said:
Yeah, lot of bucks, that's more than "common people" earn in a year with a median income of $28,xxx.
Click to expand...


Your claim that aviation is something only the rich can (or should) participate in is simply not accurate. We found a way to fly on a combined income of $20K a year, and we get to fly bunches more now despite still not being anywhere rich. It certainly doesn't take $100K a year to own a Cherokee. There ARE those who wish to limit aviation to the rich, snobs who feel that pilots are too special a group to allow the unwashed masses in. Those people are why GA is dying and airports are closing. Not lawyers, not insurance, but elitist snobs who think they are too good to associate with the common folk. The common folk are deciding they don't want to listen to the rich boys and girls fly overhead, and are voting too close airports and build shopping malls.
 
Last edited:
Joe Williams said:
Your claim that aviation is something only the rich can (or should) participate in is simply not accurate. We found a way to fly on a combined income of $20K a year, and we get to fly bunches more now despite still not being anywhere rich. It certainly doesn't take $100K a year to own a Cherokee. There ARE those who wish to limit aviation to the rich, snobs who feel that pilots are too special a group to allow the unwashed masses in. Those people are why GA is dying and airports are closing. Not lawyers, not insurance, but elitist snobs who think they are too good to associate with the common folk. The common folk are deciding they don't want to listen to the rich boys and girls fly overhead, and are voting too close airports and build shopping malls.
Click to expand...

At $20k per year and flying, how many hrs per year were you flying and what did y'all trade off for that? I did the same thing years ago, I took everything that wasn't needed directly for a meager life and spent it on aviation. I gave up a lot of comforts for it but I considered it a career investment. If I wouldn't have been working at a long established repair station that had lots of parts around and a really nice owner, There's no way I could have afforded my Travel Air. Even with the situation as it was, it was costing me $35,000 a year. Could have gotten a Masters Degree from a state school for that back then. BTW, I believe I said it take's $15,000 a year to own a an older Cherokee or 172, and that's a low figure.

Airports aren't closing because of elitism, it's about money. They close because of real estate values, same reason boat yards do. They are worth far more $$$ as condos, subdivisions and industrial parks than as airports.
 
Henning said:
So this is subsidized by the business. That's perfectly fine with me. Heck, I make my living playing with other peoples toys. I talk people into doing stuff I want all the time. The one good thing I found out about rich people, you can talk em into nearly anything if they can gain enough from the venture, and the gain doesn't have to be monetary, I sell people on $350,000 weeklong vacations.
Click to expand...

Henning, there are the well off and the superweatlhy. They are different. The superweathy hire you to protect and move their toys. But in business, if you could sign up 5 million in business that your competitors couldnt get to physically and it cost you $100K that year, that's not a business subsidy. That's the other way around. That's smart business. For some, that's really really smart operation.

Now Dennis Kozlowski's parties, that's completely another matter....
 
Henning said:
snip

Airports aren't closing because of elitism, it's about money. They close because of real estate values, same reason boat yards do. They are worth far more $$$ as condos, subdivisions and industrial parks than as airports.
Click to expand...

Then why on Earth is Albert Whitted still open?
 
bbchien said:
Henning, there are the well off and the superweatlhy. They are different. The superweathy hire you to protect and move their toys. But in business, if you could sign up 5 million in business that your competitors couldnt get to physically and it cost you $100K that year, that's not a business subsidy. That's the other way around. That's smart business. For some, that's really really smart operation.

Now Dennis Kozlowski's parties, that's completely another matter....
Click to expand...

Of course it is, like I said, "Business Aviation at its best". That's what it's all about. My point was though that Roberts personal aviation "fix" happens to be tied in with that, so it doesn't come out of his discretionary pocket money that may otherwise... remodel the bathroom for example. The business pays for it, and it benefits the business. He gets to have fun flying and everybody is happy. That's how I consider it as being "subsidized". Most subsidies have a benefit to those that issue it.
 
Henning said:
Of course it is, like I said, "Business Aviation at its best". That's what it's all about. My point was though that Roberts personal aviation "fix" happens to be tied in with that, so it doesn't come out of his discretionary pocket money that may otherwise... remodel the bathroom for example. The business pays for it, and it benefits the business. He gets to have fun flying and everybody is happy. That's how I consider it as being "subsidized". Most subsidies have a benefit to those that issue it.
Click to expand...

I think Henning is saying the business pays for it, and Bruce says that the business would not pay for it if 'paying for it' did not make business sense. Both men are correct if that is the case.

Henning also makes an excellent point (actually, the same point as above) in saying that he talks people into stuff all the time...by making his 'pitch' a win/win.

It is amazing how much money businesses will spend so long as the business has more money at the end of the year as a direct result of spending it. (Bruce's point.)

It took me a long time to learn this (maybe for the same reason that I got cleared for a visual to 2R at PDK yesterday, and started setting up for a left base to 20R...before I noticed what was happening and turned left for a quick downwind for 2R...damnit)...

But, if a company is making $x per year, and you can convince them that by spending ($_________ some BIG number)...that at the end of the year the $x will be increased by an amount that offsets the risk of the amount spent...BAM the checks start coming.

I'm also learning that having sales skills is the most important skill in getting what you want.

I simply could not afford to fly very much at all on my salary. Life happens, and you get a raise, and you get a bigger house. Next thing you know...you're still broke. Also, sales skills don't work on my wife. :(

But, when you boil it down, our system is set up to encourage three goals: creation of jobs, creation of affordable housing, and creation of wealth. The more we are able to do of the first two...the more we are rewarded with the third one. And along the way, if creating jobs, homes, and wealth means you have to fly around the country...and you just so happen to love flying around the country...what a country!
 
Joe Williams said:
Then why on Earth is Albert Whitted still open?
Click to expand...

It's proxsimity within the port and port related businesses. It's very convienient, I fly into there several times a month sometimes. Lot's of people do, therefore, it serves those real estate developers and many other business people. Plus it generates revenue for the community as a whole and has considerable business activity on the field which generates jobs and tax revenue. However, there is always this and that rumbling about it, here's from their own master plan:

"Balancing airside development with a portion of the landside property that needs to be considered and ultimately reserved for other revenue generating purposes."
 
You're both right.

Aviation does have a significance middle-class (50k-120K) following, but at a significance sacrifice. And the sacrifice is getting worse and worse all the time. AOPA says the average household income of its membership was 119K in 2003. That's about where I thought it would be. I don't think general aviation could survive were it entirely depended on the whims of the very rich. Middle-class and upper middle-class pilots, I suspect, are the economic lifeline of general aviation, $95 at a time. But the future looks bleak.

My concern is it will become so expensive to fly that pilots will fly less and less, BUT THEY WILL STILL FLY. And that makes for very unsafe pilots.
 
corjulo said:
You're both right.

Aviation does have a significance middle-class (50k-120K) following, but at a significance sacrifice. And the sacrifice is getting worse and worse all the time. AOPA says the average household income of its membership was 119K in 2003. That's about where I thought it would be. I don't think general aviation could survive were it entirely depended on the whims of the very rich. Middle-class and upper middle-class pilots, I suspect, are the economic lifeline of general aviation, $95 at a time. But the future looks bleak.

My concern is it will become so expensive to fly that pilots will fly less and less, BUT THEY WILL STILL FLY. And that makes for very unsafe pilots.
Click to expand...

A very valid concern. Here's hoping Sport Pilot lives up to the hype, and we get some cheap sport planes in production, and people actually buy them, that we can afford to fly more.
 
Joe Williams said:
A very valid concern. Here's hoping Sport Pilot lives up to the hype, and we get some cheap sport planes in production, and people actually buy them, that we can afford to fly more.
Click to expand...
Most of the light sport aircraft are coming in around 80K, which is in the same ballpark as what a new base 7ECA Citabria costs. LSA or not LSA, the economics of aircraft production demand a certain cost to make it worthwhile. The new rule makes it easier for pilots, but it isn't going to change the economics of airplanes much except insofar as it creates volume discounts -- but even then there probably won't be enough volume to make those discounts huge.
 
Joe Williams said:
A very valid concern. Here's hoping Sport Pilot lives up to the hype, and we get some cheap sport planes in production, and people actually buy them, that we can afford to fly more.
Click to expand...

It's a nice hope. It would have to bring about a significant increase in numbers to bring the price down though. Your basic non ultralite type LSA machines are still going to have to pricepoint at $75k-$100k, you can buy a typical basic GA plane for that, I can even find you a 310 for $40k:rofl: . Where I do see the advantage with the LSA machines is lower cost of operation, but I'll bet they'll still have direct operations costs of $50 hr especially the certificated ones. Experimental LSA, that is where it could go wide open, as well as the ultralight styles like the Eipper Quicksilver MXII (my personal favorite when equipped with Amphibs.) Which couldn't be properly utilized because of the one person rule.
 
Henning said:
It's a nice hope. It would have to bring about a significant increase in numbers to bring the price down though. Your basic non ultralite type LSA machines are still going to have to pricepoint at $75k-$100k, you can buy a typical basic GA plane for that, I can even find you a 310 for $40k:rofl: . Where I do see the advantage with the LSA machines is lower cost of operation, but I'll bet they'll still have direct operations costs of $50 hr especially the certificated ones. Experimental LSA, that is where it could go wide open, as well as the ultralight styles like the Eipper Quicksilver MXII (my personal favorite when equipped with Amphibs.) Which couldn't be properly utilized because of the one person rule.
Click to expand...

I'm more hopeful FBOs will buy them and rent them out than I am hoping for mass buying by individuals. It will be legal to rent LSAs, right? You can buy GA planes for the same money, but they are used 30 year old planes. Given a equal choice between FBOs I like, one renting old planes, one renting new planes, the new planes will get most of my business. Even if they are two seaters. I'm tired of flying beaters. I know folks are are interested in lessons, until they find out how old some of the planes are. No matter how well maintained (and we both know lots aren't), they are still older than a lot of the people wanting to learn to fly.
 
Joe Williams said:
I'm more hopeful FBOs will buy them and rent them out than I am hoping for mass buying by individuals. It will be legal to rent LSAs, right? You can buy GA planes for the same money, but they are used 30 year old planes. Given a equal choice between FBOs I like, one renting old planes, one renting new planes, the new planes will get most of my business. Even if they are two seaters. I'm tired of flying beaters. I know folks are are interested in lessons, until they find out how old some of the planes are. No matter how well maintained (and we both know lots aren't), they are still older than a lot of the people wanting to learn to fly.
Click to expand...

Thing about that is, the majority of planes at FBOs for rental are bought by individuals and put on line with FBOs on a leaseback agreement. Now, if the manufacturers want to put the planes out there on leaseback agreements, we may see a good amount of them come online, but that takes a large capital investment.
 
Henning said:
Thing about that is, the majority of planes at FBOs for rental are bought by individuals and put on line with FBOs on a leaseback agreement. Now, if the manufacturers want to put the planes out there on leaseback agreements, we may see a good amount of them come online, but that takes a large capital investment.
Click to expand...
Plus, to me the LSAs just don't seem robust enough to endure the hardships of rental life, from the Rotax/Jabirus to the thickness of the door plastic.

Plus the mechanics will have to be trained to maintain the engines (which most have not seen despite their relative popularity among homebuilders) and then there's the whole new set of engine parts to stock, which are likely just transitional problems, but problems nonetheless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top